2005 Atl Reports=Unnamed Subtropical Storm Report Posted

[Audrey2Katrina]

No argument there; but as we are seeing everyday, (and certainly saw with Andrew) history is constantly being revisited, and NHC reports have turned out to be anything but "final". And FWIW, "honest" historians allow for possible error, and regardless of what anyone's opinion, or report states, there is only one "truth" and the one and the other are quite frequently NOT the same.

A2K

[Pearl River]

From Katrina Discussion #26

FLIGHT-LEVEL WINDS OF 132-134 KT HAVE BEEN REPORTED IN
THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT...WHILE NOAA DOPPLER RADAR VELOCITIES FROM
WFO SLIDELL EXCEEDING 123 KT HAVE BEEN OBSERVED IN THE NORTHEAST
QUADRANT BETWEEN 12000-16000 FT. THESE WIND VALUES WOULD SUPPORT AT
LEAST 125 KT SURFACE WINDS.

From the Report

NWS Slidell WSR-88D radar data confirmed the strength of these flight-level winds, but the center of the hurricane was much too distant for the radar to provide concurrent near-surface wind estimates close to the eye.

Nowhere in the report does it mention the surface wind estimate from that discussion.

[WindRunner]

Anything but final - I might not say something quite that extreme, but if the NHC thinks that they have data to support a change in track or intensity of a storm, specifically something that couldn't have been analyzed well enough, or at all, for that matter, then I'm sure they are going to change it because they want to make sure that what is in the history books is the right determination and analysis of all the data possible. Now is what they have determined the truth? Most likely no, as the technology and resources we have today prevent us from making such sure calls, which is why the NHC probably feels required to update major storms of the past with the best analyses with today's methods and magic. All they look for is a best guess, which is all they can give right now. Hopefully, in the future, probably a long way off, we will have the resources and technology to measure and forecast such storms so that people will be safe and we will know exactly what we think will happen to them (forecasts) and what did happen to them (reports). Until then, the NHC is going to keep changing the data of past major storms all over the place to ensure the "best guess" really is there "best guess".

[Andrew92]

Tropical Storm Arlene= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL012005_Arlene.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/AR ... hics.shtml






Tropical Storm Bret= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/BR ... hics.shtml






Tropical Storm Cindy= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/CI ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Dennis= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL042005_Dennis.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/DE ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Emily= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/EM ... hics.shtml






Tropical Storm Franklin= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/FR ... hics.shtml






Tropical Storm Gert= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL072005_Gert.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/GE ... hics.shtml






Tropical Storm Harvey= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/HA ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Irene= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/IR ... hics.shtml






Tropical Depression Ten= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL102005_Ten.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/TEN_graphics.shtml






Tropical Storm Jose= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL112005_Jose.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/JO ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Katrina= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL122005_Katrina.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/KA ... hics.shtml





Tropical Storm Lee = http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL132005_Lee.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/LEE_graphics.shtml






Hurricane Maria= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/MA ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Nate= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/NA ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Ophelia= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/OP ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Philippe= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/PH ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Rita= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/RI ... hics.shtml







Tropical Depression Nineteen= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL192005_Nineteen.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/NI ... hics.shtml






Hurricane Stan= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/ST ... hics.shtml







Tropical Storm Tammy= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/TA ... hics.shtml







Sub-Tropical Depression Twenty-Two= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL222005_Twenty-two.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/TW ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Vince= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/VI ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Wilma= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL242005_Wilma.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/WI ... hics.shtml









Tropical Storm Alpha= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL252005_Alpha.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/AL ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Beta= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/BE ... hics.shtml








Tropical Storm Gamma= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/GA ... hics.shtml







Tropical Storm Delta= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/DE ... hics.shtml







Hurricane Epsilon= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/pdf/TCR-AL292005_Epsilon.pdf

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/EP ... hics.shtml







Tropical Storm Zeta= http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/archive/2005/ZE ... hics.shtml


A new page, still 18 reports to go.

[cycloneye]

A new page, still 18 reports to go.

You know the drill when a new page arrives. Thank you Andrew92 for being alert on that.

[MiamiensisWx]

Do you think damage and the surge to the Bahamas will be mentioned in the HTML version of the Wilma report?

[Javlin]

It appears that Camille might of had a higher surge in a narrower area than Katrina.The report does seem to back the idea on the size of the surge was driven by the close proximity of her Cat 5 status before landfall.The report states 27' of surge in Hancock County seems alittle low.I might be mistaken but I thought that the intersection of I-10 and HWY 603 was 35' surge mark?It does state that data is still being sought after for more conclusions.Alot of us here along the coast are fortunate that she dropped to a Cat 3 upon her arrival at her 2nd landfall.

[Pearl River]

Camille, size-wise, was smaller than Katrina. So the area of highest surge was smaller in comparison.

[mike815]

yes that is tru much much smaller

[cycloneye]

Well last week we got three reports including the important Hurricane Wilma one.Now let's see how many and which ones will come out this week.I am still waiting more for the Cindy,Emily,Rita,Stan and Vince reports.

[MiamiensisWx]

I think Emily's report will be one of the next to come out. I am eagerly anticipating that one, especially if they upgrade Emily to a Category Five.

[WindRunner]

I think Emily's report will be one of the next to come out. I am eagerly anticipating that one, especially if they upgrade Emily to a Category Five.

Well, so far that picture of the NHC's big board has held true, which would mean Emily will not be upgraded, to the dismay of many, including myself.

[MiamiensisWx]

Well, so far that picture of the NHC's big board has held true, which would mean Emily will not be upgraded, to the dismay of many, including myself.

Yep... I know. Emily probably won't be upgraded; still, you never know, especially since our predictions for which report would come out next have been wrong. Also, many expected Wilma's intensity at Florida landfall to be upgraded; however, it was downgraded. You never know!

[cycloneye]

The only thing to do now is to wait for the reports and then comment from there what they contain but anyway it's good to especulate before the reports come.

[Derek Ortt]

the downgrade of Wilma, IMO was questionable. I say this because if it is found that in sheared environments the reduction is 80%, the first storm that needs to be downgraded is Ivan to 90-95KT, along with quite a few others

[mike815]

I agree about wilma. i think they got that wrong.

[Pearl River]

Why does it have to be wrong with Wilma and not Katrina? To me both reports are skewed.

[MiamiensisWx]

I agree on Wilms. I still think that Wilma was around 125MPH at landfall, not less.

[Audrey2Katrina]

Seems like the NHC is on a downgrade roll. They used the 80% for Katrina too, otherwise the Cat 4 135-140 mph winds would have been retained at landfall. I'm with you on this one PearlRiver. But the official record is the one we're stuck with.

A2K

[mike815]

yeah were stuck with it. even if its not correct